PoliGAF 2012 |OT3| If it's not a legitimate OT the mods have ways to shut it down

Status
Not open for further replies.
Kosmo said:
One difference would be that private corporations cannot withhold government services as a bargaining chip.
Click to expand...

Sure, but what does that have to do with monetary political donations? The way I see it the point where those organizations would be threatening to withhold services comes after the election and is a completely separate issue from their ability to donate unlimited amounts of money to election campaigns. I don't see specifically why the points that you raised against unlimited union contribution can't also be used as arguments for limitations on corporate contribution in the context of holding elections.

Or to put it more concisely: why are the specific points you raised not valid for corporations as well?
 
adamsappel said:
I actually (almost) wouldn't mind a popular vote loss. Turnabout's a bitch and all.
Click to expand...

If we can't get a blowout, I think I'd prefer this. No matter what the numbers are, Republicans aren't going to recognize any sort of mandate claim, so why not have some fun at their mental expense?

To hear the crying, especially when they realize that the Electoral College deck will remain stacked against them for the next few decades, will be delicious. They'll cry and cry for the EC to be dismantled, but the votes just won't be there. And they'll have to eat that shit.

Yeah, I'm a bitter, bitter bitch. No mercy. I want them utterly broken.
 
Gruco said:
I want to see another Dick Morris electoral map. Sure, Romney may have MI and PA in the bag, but Obama is closing fast in WV and AR.
Click to expand...

That's right, he was the one with one of the worst predictions made during the 2008 election.

We got a good chuckle out of it back in 08;
BI2Oa.jpg
 
Forever said:
"Obama only won because more people voted for him, this is an outrage!"
Click to expand...

You can't mock this stuff. That is pretty much exactly what people are going to be saying if Obama wins.

Because in their mind, the narrative is that Obama is not supposed to be there. It's not about elections but what's 'right'.

And FYI, the pre-spin among the crazies is already beginning for epic salt - comments are popping up about how Obama is going to win because "we've already lost the country". Everyone in the last two generations has been tricked by the communist sleeper agents. America is over. Form a militia and arm up, get ready for them to come for you to take you to the muslim re-education camp. (You know, for gay communist muslims.)
 
How in the world did Bill Clinton hire this guy to work on his campaign in 1996. I mean someone as smart as Bill hired HIM?
1101960902_400.jpg


Thank god he got caught in that prostitution ring and Bill Clinton fired him.
 
8byte said:
Is this a joke post? I honestly can't tell, I'm bad at this sort of thing.
Click to expand...
Yes, it was.

Re: Morris

That final map doesn't even fully convey how insane his predictions were. He was seriously all over the map for the entire season, basically just randomly coloring in states.
 
That could happen, assuming a really terrible Obama scandal. I don't even think Europe collapsing could push the map that much in one direction.
 
A model based solely on unemployment is pretty damned stupid. It'd be like trying to predict Apple sales based just on other computers and how they perform vs how they sell. Marketing is what pushes Apple's sales. A presidential election is largely marketing.

If that map did happen, though, I'd shit a brick and start planning a move.
 
PhoenixDark said:
Ryan was chosen because he's a numbers guy, yet so far the campaign has refused to let him discuss any numbers. If Romney loses I bet we're gonna hear a lot about arguments over how best to use Ryan and the apparent muzzling of him

He was supposed to be giving speeches like Clinton, basically
Click to expand...

I think this is actually true.

Now, it's crazy to spend any time wondering /why/ the campaign isn't letting Ryan talk about numbers - his numbers are wildly unpopular no matter how good his grasp of them - but he was picked because of the Ryan plan and because he clearly knows what he's talking about when he's being honest about what he wants to do.

If Romney loses, Ryan is going to be trying to rescue his political career - I don't see him getting a reality show like Palin - and he's going to try to emerge as the leader of the "Romney wasn't a true conservative; if he'd embraced the Ryan plan the public would have flocked to him" faction of the party.
 
I think it may be too late to put out Ryan as a "numbers guy". He damaged his reputation with the media as a straight shooter with his lies. His RNC speech in particular damned him. Him being caught lying again about something as frivolous as his marathon time sealed the deal, I think. And you can see that in the interviews he had in the Sunday talk shows last week.
 
Rush Limbaugh Predicts 'End of Republican Party' If Obama Wins Election

http://www.mediaite.com/online/rush...of-republican-party-if-obama-wins-re-election

On his syndicated radio show Monday afternoon, conservative host Rush Limbaugh predicted that if President Barack Obama wins re-election, it will mean an end to the Republican Party and the triggering of economic collapse within 18 months.

...

He went on to refer to MSNBC host Chris Matthews saying last week that an Obama re-election would mean the end of conservatism. “Nope,” Limbaugh disagreed, “if Obama wins, it’s the end of the Republican Party.”

“There’s going to be a third party that’s going to be orientated towards conservatism — or Rand Paul thinks libertarianism,” he continued. 'If Obama wins, the Republican Party will try to maneuver things so conservatives get blamed. The only problem is right now, Romney is not running a conservative campaign.' "
Click to expand...

Interesting. I think it'll take longer to go through its death throes..
 
This morning I was checking Intrade and noticed there were over two thousand shares of "Obama wins" available at $5.90 apiece (pays $10 each if he wins). I seriously considered borrowing twelve thousand dollars....

I figured that Intrade was still pricing in uncertainty and that, say, after the first debate or so, it'd have to pop up, but Bernstein thinks that Intrade is just mostly Republican, in which case Obama shares will probably be trading at a significant discount right up into November. (Although I note all that slack in the market is gone now and Obama's up to 60%, so maybe they're finally bowing to the inevitable.) That would be a hell of a bet.

Averon said:
I think it may be too late to put out Ryan as a "numbers guy". He damaged his reputation with the media as a straight shooter with his lies. His RNC speech in particular damned him. Him being caught lying again about something as frivolous as his marathon time sealed the deal, I think. And you can see that in the interviews he had in the Sunday talk shows last week.
Click to expand...

This is what happens when you're not ready for prime time. Ryan is going to have reporters playing gotcha with him every time he goes on a non-Fox channel for the next five years -- the media narrative is set, even if people don't all buy into it. Ryan's a liar, ask him questions and watch him sweat.
 
richiek said:
Hey guys, remember this?

University of Colorado prediction model points to big Romney win

electoral-college-png1.jpg
Click to expand...
Yes. And I remember the posts explicating the flaws in their model. The DailyCaller should read PoliGAF.
PhoenixDark said:
Ryan was chosen because he's a numbers guy, yet so far the campaign has refused to let him discuss any numbers. If Romney loses I bet we're gonna hear a lot about arguments over how best to use Ryan and the apparent muzzling of him

He was supposed to be giving speeches like Clinton, basically
Click to expand...
Rather, Ryan was positioned as a numbers guy. He was purportedly a serious, admirable wonk willing to talk about serious issues-or whatever titles of nonsense the pundits effusively bestowed him. But a careful examination of his work reveals several flaws. He's demonstrated a proclivity for cooking his budget analyses. And the Romney campaign has yet to delineate its plan. Thus, what numbers is he going to talk about? The Romney campaign is not preventing him from talking about the numbers. Instead, there's nothing for him to talk about.
 
pigeon said:
Unbelievable crosstabs. Obama's score among registered voters remained almost exactly the same as last poll -- but the spread between registered and likely dropped from 8% to 1%. In other words, a huge chunk of that gain comes from registered but unlikely voters deciding they're going to vote after all this year.

Also worth noting that Obama's up by 8 among likely voters when when third-party candidates are considered.
Click to expand...
...where are you getting that number from?
 
RDreamer said:
We're headed toward an economic collapse? Did he miss 2008? I swear, listening to him you'd think he completely missed 2008.
Click to expand...

He's confusing economic collapse in 18 months with economic boom.

The economy is gradually improving. We're about to cross a chasm and enter a boom in about a year I think.

But death of the current GOP...he's probably right. The platform doesn't fit reality, demographics, and trends. Maybe we'll get Rockefeller GOP or Libertarian (center right) GOP. Any of them is better than dumbfuck GOP.
 
pigeon said:
This morning I was checking Intrade and noticed there were over two thousand shares of "Obama wins" available at $5.90 apiece (pays $10 each if he wins). I seriously considered borrowing twelve thousand dollars....

I figured that Intrade was still pricing in uncertainty and that, say, after the first debate or so, it'd have to pop up, but Bernstein thinks that Intrade is just mostly Republican, in which case Obama shares will probably be trading at a significant discount right up into November. (Although I note all that slack in the market is gone now and Obama's up to 60%, so maybe they're finally bowing to the inevitable.) That would be a hell of a bet.
Click to expand...
I thought something similar, but if I lost my wife would ensure my body was never found.
 
Talon- said:
...where are you getting that number from?
Click to expand...

I was a couple points off, sorry -- it's 7 to 2. In August Obama led by 7 among registered voters and was even among likely voters -- 7 point spread. Now he leads by 8 among registered voters and 6 among likely -- 2 point spread.
 
The end of rednecky GOP? That'd be fascinating to watch, especially here in the South. It would leave a lot of people politically stranded.
 
teh_pwn said:
He's confusing economic collapse in 18 months with economic boom.

The economy is gradually improving. We're about to cross a chasm and enter a boom in about a year I think.

But death of the current GOP...he's probably right. The platform doesn't fit reality, demographics, and trends. Maybe we'll get Rockefeller GOP or Libertarian (center right) GOP. Any of them is better than dumbfuck GOP.
Click to expand...

Should Obama win and in 18 months the economy be moving really quickly (as most predict), I cannot wait to hear the Republican spin.

It's because of what we did despite Obama's policies! We'd be a 10% GDP growth per year if not for Obama! Sure, we added 10 million jobs in the last 4 years, but are those jobs where people really work?

Good times will be had.
 
teh_pwn said:
But death of the current GOP...he's probably right. The platform doesn't fit reality, demographics, and trends. Maybe we'll get Rockefeller GOP or Libertarian (center right) GOP. Any of them is better than dumbfuck GOP.
Click to expand...

I do wonder about this third party business. I would think it would take longer, but the buildup and bubble surrounding conservatives has reached a breaking point now. I think if anything was ever going to push them over the edge of sanity it would be Obama's re-election. If Limbaugh's already building up the narrative that the establishment got who they want and he's going to lose despite the base wanting something else I do wonder if that sort of thinking is more widespread or will become more widespread.

It's kind of odd thinking about how that would turn out. On one hand you'd think the people that would go crazy and want out would be the tea party, but then again that was pretty much backed by big money and the establishment, so it's really hard to imagine it bucking establishment republicanism. At the same time I could see Libertarianism being a decent 3rd party and breaking off to get support, but then again the people that are really going to be distraught and angry after an Obama win aren't the pure libertarians. They're the religious right, and I don't think they'd go for pure libertarianism, but who knows.
 
pigeon said:
"Shares your values:" Obama +2 two weeks ago, Obama +7 today (5 pt swing)
"Strong and decisive leader:" Romney +5 two weeks ago, Obama +6 today (11 pt swing)
"Has an optimistic vision for our country's future:" Romney +4 two weeks ago, Obama +10 today (14 pt swing)
"Has a clear plan": Romney +6 two weeks ago, Obama +6 today (12 pt swing)
"In touch with middle-class Americans:" Obama +6 two weeks ago, Obama +20 today (14 pt swing)
"Can manage government effectively:" Romney +4 two weeks ago, Obama +3 today (7 pt swing)

Now that's a convention bounce.
Click to expand...

While I'm thrilled at the numbers, I do have to say some of those prior stats were just WTF.

Mitt leading on being a strong and decisive leader? SERIOUSLY?
 
Mitt decisively declared that his campaign didn't have to have a consistent stance on anything, and has refused to waiver from that, even in the face of intense criticism.
 
RDreamer said:
I do wonder about this third party business. I would think it would take longer, but the buildup and bubble surrounding conservatives has reached a breaking point now. I think if anything was ever going to push them over the edge of sanity it would be Obama's re-election. If Limbaugh's already building up the narrative that the establishment got who they want and he's going to lose despite the base wanting something else I do wonder if that sort of thinking is more widespread or will become more widespread.

It's kind of odd thinking about how that would turn out. On one hand you'd think the people that would go crazy and want out would be the tea party, but then again that was pretty much backed by big money and the establishment, so it's really hard to imagine it bucking establishment republicanism. At the same time I could see Libertarianism being a decent 3rd party and breaking off to get support, but then again the people that are really going to be distraught and angry after an Obama win aren't the pure libertarians. They're the religious right, and I don't think they'd go for pure libertarianism, but who knows.
Click to expand...

Think of it as a generational thing. There's probably a lot of young voters that are center right economically but really don't care for the "gay marriage is immoral" line of thinking. It would probably take a talented leader to attract these voters and break into demographics that lean left right now. Something like this has to happen eventually because a party of old and white isn't going to last.

But on the other hand, this is close to Obama politically right now. Maybe the GOP will go off the political conveyor belt to the right and the Dems will flip to right, and a new progressive party will emerge.
 
CharlieDigital said:
Yeah, but I've said this: where are they going to magically round up these moderate Conservatives?
Click to expand...

This is the tricky question. How many socially liberal, economically conservative Democratic voters are there, really? And how quickly can the GOP purge itself of the "party of hates all minorities" label? It seems clear that the realignment is going to move leftwards in terms of social values, but I think that it's going to necessitate an economic shift as well. After all, after 2014, the GOP is going to have to come to terms with the existence of Obamacare if they want to win. That means accepting a certain level of social support, something else they've been spending a lot of time making sure nobody will believe them on recently.

I dunno, I expect the GOP to start trying to reinvent itself immediately -- and we'll probably see Rubio beat out Ryan in 2016 -- but I don't think they'll actually be successful for a while, until the Democrats move further to the left. Which sounds good to me.

RDreamer said:
I do wonder about this third party business. I would think it would take longer, but the buildup and bubble surrounding conservatives has reached a breaking point now. I think if anything was ever going to push them over the edge of sanity it would be Obama's re-election. If Limbaugh's already building up the narrative that the establishment got who they want and he's going to lose despite the base wanting something else I do wonder if that sort of thinking is more widespread or will become more widespread.

It's kind of odd thinking about how that would turn out. On one hand you'd think the people that would go crazy and want out would be the tea party, but then again that was pretty much backed by big money and the establishment, so it's really hard to imagine it bucking establishment republicanism. At the same time I could see Libertarianism being a decent 3rd party and breaking off to get support, but then again the people that are really going to be distraught and angry after an Obama win aren't the pure libertarians. They're the religious right, and I don't think they'd go for pure libertarianism, but who knows.
Click to expand...

They'll both be gone forever. The Libertarians are almost gone already -- they have like four third parties to choose from. The GOP will have to cut the religious right off too, and they'll take off for the American Freedom Party or whatever they're called now. They were a fringe force before the 80s and they'll go back to being a fringe force. That leaves the core elements of the GOP -- a party of supporting business, repressing labor, lowering taxes, and limiting the expansion of social programs where possible. In other words, a conservative party.
 
If the Republican party does collapse (I don't see it happening) it will be interesting to see that one party has collapsed and recreated itself at least three times in American history while the other has more or less existed persistently.
 
Gruco said:
Mitt decisively declared that his campaign didn't have to have a consistent stance on anything, and has refused to waiver from that, even in the face of intense criticism.
Click to expand...

You could say that he's had a consistent stance, all along.

csi_miami_yeaaaaaaah.gif

pigeon said:
Iand we'll probably see Rubio beat out Ryan in 2016
Click to expand...

We've had some debate on this on PoliGAF, but I would see Ryan as done if Romney doesn't win this year; he becomes a known quantity and a liability. Rape stuff doesn't go away. Lies don't go away. Medicare cuts and voucher system don't go away. He retains all of his unfavorables.
 
pigeon said:
After all, after 2014, the GOP is going to have to come to terms with the existence of Obamacare if they want to win. That means accepting a certain level of social support, something else they've been spending a lot of time making sure nobody will believe them on recently.
Click to expand...

This is a good point, It's already happening according to Romney on Leno and Meet the Press. I was in Oregon/Washington all last week, and was happy to see so many
"I <3 Obamacare" bumper stickers. I realize those are lib states, but so is CT, where I am, and I've never seen that bumper sticker once.

The thing is they will blame the need for reinvention on Romney, but most intelligent people will recognize Obama actually predicted this during the health care debates, when he stated, congressional Republicans were free to take up the tea party torch, so long as they were cognizant of the corner it backs them into. They did not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Sports betting |OT|
7
11K
Hideous Snake replied
ItalianGAF |OT| - Italia
3
1K
Azzurri replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
UK PoliGAF |OT3| - Strong and Stable Government? No. Coalition Of Chaos!
37 38 39 40 41
2K
258K
firehawk12 replied
Food |OT| GAFeteria
2
77
17K
SLoWMoTIoN replied
Top Bottom